Comparative Methodological Critique of Two Research Studies

This text is a comparative methodological critique of two research studies: “Quantitative analysis of food products allocation into food consumption styles for material flow analysis of food” by Munsol Ju, Masahiro Osako, Sachihiko Harashina (2015) and “A Qualitative Study Exploring Management of Food Intake in the United Kingdom During the Coronavirus Pandemic” by Tennessee Randall, Chloe Mellor and Laura L. Wilkinson (2022). The first study aimed to find out food allocation factors on the basis of consumption style to provide the first step for future material flow analysis of food. The second study aimed to explore the influences that affected eating behaviors during the Covid-19 pandemic. The purpose of this paper is to provide an extensive critique of the two chosen articles and to understand the various differences in data collection and research technique between qualitative and quantitative research methods. Is there anything else you would like to know?

1
COMPARATIVE METHODOLOGICAL CRITIQUE OF TWO RESEARCH STUDIES
INTRODUCTION
Research is a complex and extensive process that consists of identifying, interpreting,
generating and processing new knowledge. Research is an essential part of being a competent
professional in any line of work. It is a process of systematic data collection that has a clear
purpose and goals related to the findings.
Both qualitative and quantitative methods of analysis are used extensively by researchers
in order to analyse public opinion trends while conducting research. The results obtained from
these methods of social research give significant indications of the variability between the
parameters of the research. This essay critically analyses the feasibility, limitations and
differences of the research techniques applied by each method in order to understand the
interdisciplinary nature of the research.
The end result of any type of research is always new knowledge. This new knowledge is
not only important for making decisions at the individual, organizational or national level, it is
also important for learning more about the context of the research question environment (sensing).
This critique aims at comparing two methodological research studies, namely, “Quantitative
analysis of food products allocation into food consumption styles for material flow analysis of
food” by Munsol Ju, Masahiro Osako, Sachihiko Harashina (2015) and “A Qualitative Study
Exploring Management of Food Intake in the United Kingdom During the Coronavirus Pandemic”
by Tennessee Randall, Chloe Mellor and Laura L. Wilkinson (2022).
The purpose of this paper is to provide an extensive critique of the two chosen articles, to
help understand the various differences in data collection and research technique between
qualitative and quantitative research methods and to generate experience for future research.

2
AIMS OF THE RESEARCH STUDIES
The main aim of the research study “Quantitative analysis of food products allocation into
food consumption styles for material flow analysis of food” (Ju, Osako and Harashina, 2015) was
to find out food allocation factors on the basis of consumption style to provide the first step for
future material flow analysis of food. The research aims of the study are listed below:
 To identify if the food-choice behaviour impacts the processes from food production to
consumption to the disposal system,
 To identify the environmental impact caused by foods and whether it is different depending on
the consumption style, due to the difference of the food materials used in each style.
The researchers quantitatively analysed the weight-based allocation factors of food products
by food consumption style. The results of the study further showed that convenience meals and
meals outside the home include little fruit, seaweed, or milk, while meat, seafood, and fat and oil
comprise a relatively large portion of convenience meals. This study also determined the difference
between weight- and expenditure-based factors. Calculating correct allocation factors is important
in material flow analysis, as they greatly influence the environmental impact estimations of food
supply chain sectors.
The main aim of the research study “A Qualitative Study Exploring Management of Food
Intake in the United Kingdom During the Coronavirus Pandemic” (Randall, Mellor and Wilkinson,
2022) was to explore the influences that affected the eating behaviours during the pandemic of
Covid 19. The objectives of the study were to:
 To explore the extent to which eating habits have changed during the pandemic due to
emotional eating (i.e., anxiety, stress, boredom),
 To explore management of food consumption as a consequence of changes to the food
environment brought by the pandemic (e.g., supermarket shortages, food establishment
closures), and
 To explore panic buying that may be driven by social factors or through individual threat
perception of the pandemic.
The study aims at understanding the contextual factors that underpin appetitive triggers as
essential to prevent further unintended weight gain and continuous reliance on maladaptive coping
strategies.

3
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH STUDY
Ju, M., Osako, M. and Harashina, S. (2015). Quantitative analysis of food products allocation into
food consumption styles for material flow analysis of food. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste
Management, 18(3), pp.589–597. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-015-0358-y.
The quantitative research approach refers to the deductive approach to testing theory, or the
so-called positivist model of knowledge verification, which reflects an objective view of what is
taken as truth in relation to the topic under study. Quantitative study often relies on data that can be
shown in quantities and are measurable to determine various issues on the population sample.
Quantitative research methods typically consist of more than one type of data collection for the
purpose of collecting data to support the theory model used for the research (nominal data, ordinal
data, interval data, ratio data). This research method attempts to investigate the answers to the
questions starting with how many, how much, to what extent (Rasinger, 2013).
The quantitative research was conducted using the data to calculate the allocation factors
were based on the Family Income and Expenditure Survey where most of the data indicate net food
consumption (without inedible parts), except for fresh food. Therefore, net food for the allocation
basis, and inedible portions were subtracted for fresh foods, were selected. Raw-net food material
consumption as the basis for calculating the allocation factors based on food consumption style was
used. This study was conducted with approximately 200 food items data in Family Income and
Expenditure Survey data in Japan and more than 100 of composition data of cooked foods and
meals outside the home to obtain reliable allocation factors. The discrepancy between weight-based
allocation factors and expenditure-based allocation factors and calculated the portion of food
material costs in the expenditure-based allocation were analysed. The calculated food material
costs with the actual food material costs from prices of processed foods, cooked foods, and meals
outside the home were compared and if the results of the study were valid, the two values should be
the same. Two assumptions were made to complete this calculation. The first is that the food
material cost factors are the same as the weight-based factors. The second is that the fresh food’s
price represents the food material cost. There was no significant difference between the material
cost ratios calculated by this study and the actual values, and the differences can be explained by
the food loss of each food industry because this study did not consider food loss. Two assumptions
were made to complete the calculation. The first was that the food material cost factors are the

4
same as the weight-based factors. The second was that the fresh food’s price represents the food
material cost. In the research were used Family Income and Expenditure Survey data, unit price
data, composition of food items data, and food weight change from cooking. As a result, the
allocation factors of food products for meals at home, convenience meals, and meals outside the
home were calculated to be 81, 8, and 11 %, respectively. It differed largely from expenditure-
based allocation factors. To verify the findings, material cost ratios for food prices using the gap
between weight-based and expenditure-based allocation factors were compared, and the results
with actual material cost ratios were compared.
The conclusion to the research study showed that the comparison results between calculated
material cost ratios and actual ratios proved that the weight-based allocation factors calculated in
this study are an adequate representation of product contents. Moreover, food waste generation
characteristics can be predicted through food flow analysis, and the allocation factors make it
possible to promote more efficient food policy.

5
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH STUDY
Randall, T., Mellor, C. and Wilkinson, L.L. (2022). A Qualitative Study Exploring Management of
Food Intake in the United Kingdom During the Coronavirus Pandemic. Frontiers in Psychology,
13. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.869510.
The qualitative research approach is often associated with an inductive approach to
generating theory using an interpretive model for generating knowledge that allows for the
existence of different subjective perspectives on what is true in the construction of knowledge.
Flick (2014, p. 542) claimed that “Qualitative research interested in analysing subjective meaning
or the social production of issues, events, or practices by collecting non-standardised data and
analysing texts and images rather than number and statistics.” This definition stressed on how
people make sense of something in the world.
The data for the research were generated from 40 in-depth interviews. The primary
researcher strengthened the research dialog through reflecting on the interview process and
recognizing the questions that were most effective for addressing the research aims. The
participants were informed on the aim of the research to understand their management of food
during the coronavirus pandemic, and the impact of lockdown on eating habits. Sampling criteria
has excluded the participants under the age of 18, or anyone with eating disorder diagnosis.
Interviews were recorded on Zoom and audio files were imported to Otter for data transcription.
The software Quirkos was used for data analysis where all transcripts were uploaded. Quirkos was
used to organize and code transcripts. Reflexive thematic analysis was utilized (Braun and Clarke,
2006) due to the novelty of the research question (given the pandemic context) and because it has
theoretical flexibility, so enables greater versatility for interpretation of patterns (Clarke and
Braun, 2017). Prior to analysis, transcripts were read multiple times to gain a consensus of
participant’s experience of food consumption and shopping habits during the initial lockdown. The
coding process began by identifying words, sentences and paragraphs that were related to the
research question.
The convenience sample consisted of 40 participants; 25 (62.5%) were female.
Participant’s mean age was 41.9 years (SD = 14.4) and were mainly living in Wales (N = 30). The
remaining 10 participants lived in England. Based on the results of the study, the key theme
highlighted the opportunity to cook more fresh food at home. The findings show the opportunities

6
for cooking fresh food were heavily influenced by time management. Despite a perceived
improvement to diet, lockdown measures meant prolonged periods were spent at home and
changes to work commitments meant surplus time was available. The participants had perceptions
that these environmental changes led to the development of maladaptive eating behaviours. The
occurrence of such behaviours could be interpreted through the theory of emotion regulation
(Gross, 1998). Lockdown measures meant prolonged periods were spent at home and changes to
work commitments meant that surplus time was available. The findings pointed out the complex
relation between weight management and disordered eating habits, and appropriate coping
strategies were critical to ensure that initial eating problems didn’t surpass clinical thresholds.
The findings highlighted a number of opportunities for future research, which should
integrate an economic and a psychological understanding to better predict consumer behaviour and
prevent future problems with panic buying. The limitations of this research are attributed primarily
to the sample demographics. As previously mentioned, all participants were employed or received
furlough money throughout the pandemic.

7
CONCLUSION
The quantitative findings could be generalised to a whole population or a sub-
population because it involves the larger sample which is randomly selected (Carr, 1994). The
quantitative research has limitations too. The positivism research paradigm leaves out the
common meanings of social phenomenon (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998). It also fails to ascertain
deeper underlying meanings and explanations. Another limitation of quantitative research is
that the positivism cannot account for how the social reality is shaped and maintained, or how
people interpret their actions and others (Blaikie, 2007). The qualitative research approach
produces a thick (detailed) description of participants’ feelings, opinions, and experiences; and
interprets the meanings of their actions (Krause and Denzin, 1989). Silverman (2010) argues that
qualitative research approaches sometimes leave out contextual sensitivities and focus more on
meanings and experiences. In terms of research method, smaller sample size raises the issue of
generalizability to the whole population of the research.
It is quite clear that qualitative research is a completely different type of research in relation
to quantitative research. However, very often people generalise things and assume that qualitative
research as opposed to quantitative research is less accurate. The proper thing is that qualitative
research methods are just as precise and are guided by clear research rules, the only difference
being that qualitative research explores issues that cannot be expressed in numbers.

8
REFERENCES:
Blaikie, N. (2007). Approaches to social enquiry (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Polity Press.
Braun, V., and Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 3,
77–101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Carr, L. T. (1994). The strengths and weaknesses of quantitative and qualitative research: What
method for nursing? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 20(4), 716-721.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1994.20040716.x
Clarke, V., and Braun, V. (2017). Thematic analysis. J. Posit. Psychol. 12, 297–298. doi:
10.1080/17439760.2016.1262613
Gross, J. J. (1998). Antecedent- and response-focused emotion regulation: divergent consequences
for experience, expression, and physiology. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 74, 224–237. doi:
10.1037//0022-3514.74.1.224
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1998). The landscape of qualitative research: Theories and issues.
London: SAGE Publications.
Flick, U. (2014). An introduction to qualitative research (5th ed.). London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Ju, M., Osako, M. and Harashina, S. (2015). Quantitative analysis of food products allocation into
food consumption styles for material flow analysis of food. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste
Management, 18(3), pp.589–597. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-015-0358-y.
Krause, D. and Denzin, N.K. (1989). The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological
Methods. Teaching Sociology, 17(4), p.500. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/1318434.
Randall, T., Mellor, C. and Wilkinson, L.L. (2022). A Qualitative Study Exploring Management of
Food Intake in the United Kingdom During the Coronavirus Pandemic. Frontiers in Psychology,
13. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.869510.
Rasinger, S. M. (2013). Quantitative research in linguistics: An introduction. A & C Black.
Silverman, D. (2010). Qualitative research. London: Sage.